HOW DOES WILLIAMS CREATE A SENSE OF TENSION AND DRAMA IN THIS EXTRACT? (30 MARKS)

Constant themes of tension and drama are presented by Williams in ‘A Streetcar’ and they often come together, probably because one leads to another. One if Williams’ traits is that he takes ordinary, relatable situations but laces them with much more meaning and I think this particular extract [scene four, Blanche’s monologue] really demonstrates the complexity between the characters whilst maintaining a level of drama for the audience.

The lead up to Blanche’s big outcry of opinion could potentially be more important than the monologue itself as it presents ideas of sex, religion, self-conflict and even love.

“But there are things that happen between a man and woman in the dark – that sort of make everything else seem - unimportant.”  

I think this line said by Stella is where the tension becomes less tense and more dramatic. She tiptoes around the idea of sex and this could make the audience immediately feel a sense of awkwardness. Williams has already managed to provide ambiance without any real levels of conflict. Her almost patronising tone gives off a dominant vibe, as if anything Blanche has to say about Stanley is irrelevant as at least Stella has somebody that Blanche can provide opinions against. The blatant pause then followed by the word “unimportant” could be interpreted as a direct reference to Blanche’s thoughts on Stanley and Stella goes on to ask Blanche whether she’s “ever ridden on that streetcar [of desire]?” to which Blanche responds with “it brought me here. – Where I’m not wanted and where I’m ashamed to be”. I do feel as though this entire quote is mounted with irony. For example, Blanche states that she’s “not wanted” even though literally the only person who makes her feel unwelcome is Stanley. This could be highlighting her desire and attraction for Stanley as only his opinion seems to matter. Also, “where I’m ashamed to be” is pretty rich coming from someone from Blanche’s living situation. It seems as though she’s still stuck in the past and completely bypasses the fact that she’s essentially homeless, as if being on the streets would be better than living in a culturally diverse, revolutionary ‘New America’. Blanche is very traditional and this comes across plainly in the conversation and monologue performed by Blanche.

“A man like that is someone to go out with – once – twice – three times when the devil is in you. But live with! Have a child by?”

Religion isn’t something touched on in ‘Streetcar’, but of course if it is, it’s mentioned by Blanche. “When the devil is in you” obviously is annotated with thoughts of sin and even disgust although I still feel as though there’s a level of understanding behind Blanche’s words – she doesn’t disregard Stella’s decision to sleep with him, in fact she almost encourages it but as soon as her traditional values are compromised by sex and change, it becomes a problem. This is a recurring theme in Blanche’s speech and actions, a constant conflict between desire and values, and the dynamic creates a dramatic contradiction for the audience. Stella makes a point of saying “I can’t help your trembling if you insist on trembling!” after saying that she is in love with Stanley. This line, in my opinion, is probably one of the best summarisations of Blanche in the play. She’s a walking contradiction and I think that the tension created in this scene really brings out the side of Blanche that maybe the audience chooses to ignore in order to remain sympathetic towards her. “Trembling” is also a word heavily associated with fear or paranoia, two themes that begin to become clearer and clearer as we get to know the characters. It could be foreshadowing the inevitable breakdown of not only Blanche’s mind but her relationships as well, this tension and drama created by Williams seems to be one huge flashing arrow pointing to the tension and drama that the audience is met with at the end of the play.

Blanche starts her big speech with “You can’t have forgotten that much of our binging up, Stella”. Again, Blanche has hidden behind her past to defend her failing future. Part of me thinks that Blanche is envious of Stella and because the most important things that make up Blanche are her looks and where she came from, it’s almost as though she uses her background as a mechanism to gain power – a theme heavily associated with drama.

The monologue itself is Blanche essentially comparing Stanley to ape like creatures, which is odd considering that Stanley is supposed to be representing change and progress.

“Bearing the raw meat home from the kill in the jungle!” Is a pivotal quote as it’s a

direct reference to Stanley throwing raw meat at Stella during an argument at the beginning of the play. Taking the audience back to that tense moment allows Williams to maintain his melodramatic repertoire by constantly reminding them of the conflict between characters. The word “jungle” could be an accurate representation of Blanche’s views on New Orleans as it’s unknown and unfamiliar, a lot like a jungle.

Another quote that I think is held with a lot of irony is: “And you – you here – waiting for him!” As we know, Blanche’s husband killed himself when he was young and ever since, Blanche seems to be trying to fill the void by getting kicks out of men being attracted to her. She kissed a young man collecting money for the papers simply because he was young and looked like “a prince from Arabian nights”. It’s even suggested that the reason she’s is no longer a teacher is because she was found sleeping with underage boys and it seems ironic that Blanche is disgusted at Stella for waiting for her husband and baby father – no matter how beastly he may be – when Blanche is also waiting but for something much less clearer than anything I could ever imagine.

To conclude, I think that a lot of the dramatic tones created by Williams is done through contradiction. We see Stella and Stanley, a couple who expresses love through violence and we see Blanche, somebody who practises different to what she preaches. In the end, the audience witness Blanche get raped by the very character who represents ‘New America’ and I think the whole play is based around how dramatic the simplicity of being forced into a world that you’re not ready for can be.

'A STREETCAR NAMED DESIRE' INTRODUCTION...

"In a word, this play made it seem possible for the stage to express any and all things and to do so beautifully. What streetcar's first production did was to plant the flag of beauty on the shores of commercial theatre. The audience, I believe, somehow understood this and was moved by what, in effect, was a kind of tribute to its intelligence and spiritual vitality. For the play, more than any of Williams' other works before or afterwards, approaches tragedy and its dark ending is unmitigated." -Arthur Miller
Arthur Miller tributes 'A Streetcar' with a sincere recognition of its influence and demonstrates an understanding of its complexity by highlighting the story's simplicity. Contradictory, I know - but ultimately, Williams' ability to make the emotional truth so beautiful is something Miller seems to awe over. The quote above is an extract taken from the introduction written by Miller himself and it summarises the ambience of the play and I feel as though Miller really believed as he was watching the first ever showing of 'A Streetcar Named Desire', that the play was to empathise with every single person filling the theatre seats and allow them to perceive the world exactly how Williams did; a beautiful nightmare.  

A CRITIQUE OF A CRITIQUE

FORBIDDEN FRUITS – SEX AND RELIGION IN ‘GOBLIN MAKRET’ –Ray Cluley

Cluley jumps straight into this critique with ideas of sex and sexuality. He touches on the difference between Lizzie and Laura and demonstrates a mediocre understanding of the contrast between sexual attractions. “Laura, 'bowed her head to hear', making an effort to listen to the goblin men, whereas Lizzie 'veiled her blushes', modestly hiding what was considered an erotic response in Victorian literature.” Cluley acknowledges the fact the Laura and Lizzie are displaying opposite characteristics and links it to context but doesn’t completely explain what that is a result of. For example, Laura could have ‘bowed her head to hear’ to show her desire to become a woman of the marketplace. This could be interpreted as her feeling like the only way to become free from man is to do the opposite of social norms (by becoming a working girl) even though the Victorian era held prostitution at its peak. Lizzie on the other hand, approaches the situation not by temptation but by avoidance all together.

Cluley however does make an interesting point, suggesting that “the poem develops this hurried ripening of fruits” and this “can be likened to a rush into sexual maturity.” But again doesn’t even attempt to touch on the everlasting question of why the sisters feel like they need to be rushed into sexual maturity. Could it be marriage? Expectation? Or even rebellion?

Towards the end of the first paragraph, he does imply some sort of incest or homosexuality without really stating exactly what he means. Personally, I think if you’re going to start a critique of a highly complex poem with something as simple as sexual desire, you should touch on every aspect of what exactly it is you mean. Had Cluley more deeply explored the correlation between context and content, his opinions may read less like a teenage boy’s rampant tactics to relate sex to every existing thing on the planet.

COMPARE AND CONTRAST HOW ROSSETTI SHOWS HER VIEWS OF DEATH AND THE AFTERLIFE IN THE POEMS 'SONG' AND 'REMEMBER'

Both ‘Song’ and ‘Remember’ share similar themes like exploring life after death, although the concepts involved seem to be presented in fairly different ways. In these two poems, Rossetti seems to be fixated on the idea of dying and forgetting. As an independent female in the 1800’s, it’s understandable how free thinkers, such as Rossetti, would often see death as an escape and as she was heavily religious, it could even be thought after as idyllic.

Both poems focus on some sort of conversation involving death and both demonstrate a sense of self controversy. Considering that the two poems are conveying a different message and yet still display lines of doubt could be a pure representation of Rossetti’s own views and not just the speakers’.

In the poem ‘Remember’, the first line of the poem states “Remember me when I am gone away”. This is a euphemism and the speaker is clearly trying to touch on the subject as delicately as possible. On the other hand, in ‘Song’, the speaker immediately begins with “When I am dead, my dearest”. This is a complete contrast to ‘Remember’ and in only the first line of each of the poems, there is a completely different approach to the speaker’s perception of death.

A more interesting example of a euphemism in ‘Remember’ follows up the first one in the second line: “Gone far away into the silent land”. What is a silent land? It represents neither death nor life; it’s neither physical nor spiritual. I think this highlights the speakers’ liminant feelings as they’re referring to death as a “land”, a human thing but also referring it to “silent”, something that rarely exists in the mundane world.

An example of the speakers’ liminant tone in ‘Song’ is in the last two lines of the first stanza.

“And if thou wilt, remember,

And if thou wilt, forget.”

Not only has the speaker contradicted herself, implying her level of insecurity but the structural choices in this line are also interesting. The majority of ‘Remember’ is written in Iambic Trimeter – a meter of poetry consisting of three iambic beats per line. If you notice however, Rossetti has chosen to leave parts of the poem out of this structure leaving the reader with perfect and non-perfect lines. The first line: “And if thou wilt remember” is written non-perfectly and the second; “And if thou wilt forget” is a perfect line. This finalising the line with the word “forget” and it shows a level of sureness as if the speaker is certain that forgetting is the absolute outcome. 

ROSSETTI

HOW DOES THE THE SPEAKER FROM 'I COME FROM' CREATE A SENSE OF IDENTITY?

In the poem 'I Come From' (Robert Seatter), the speaker begins to build up his persona with a series of language and structural techniques. 

The most obvious and literal approach the speaker uses is the opening words and title of the poem, "I come from". The sheer simplicity of this line reflects his identity as your background really moulds your persona. He also uses this line to structure a somewhat chaotic self expression of his identity. This could indicate how the speaker has tried to apply this to his lifestyle as he's trying to inject some structure or form into something as turbulent as the world he lives in. 

Most of the poem seems to be a collection of recalled memories, such as "I come from Chambers Etymological Dictionary" and "11+". Memories are like the foundations of who we are, they influence our actions and separate us from the rest of man kind. 
However, the types of phrases that are used in the poem could apply to a lot of people and Seatter utilizes this to begin to build up a personality from a series of disconnected memories that when tied together, connect to create a rather specific yet relate-able personality.

The structure is used to further empathize the identity created by the speaker in the poem. I would describe the arrangement of the poem as a stream of conciousness and Seatter has smartly used this to grasp the concept of emotional intimacy. This is because that at times, when something is formal and purposefully structured, it takes away the freedom and expression of something or someone. Obeying rules or conforming to a set of guidelines isn't a a true reflection of who you are. 

The first two lines of the poem read: "I come from a suburb waiting forever for the train to London". This is not a very specific line for someone describing their identity and could apply to anyone living in a suburb. 
The word "suburb" describes a place that is neither in the city or in the country leaving a sort of unknown gap between two places. This suggests that at the start of the poem, the speaker doesn't really know who he is and the details get more definitive as we go on through the text - almost like journey. 

Seatter really brings attention to the observation of trains. If the speaker is not waiting for one, indicated on the last line, he's listening to "the sound through the night of trains, trains, trains". The most critical part of information is the idea of trains starts the poem and ends the poem. This relates to the concept before that the speaker is going on a journey and whilst on it, he starts gathering and collecting memories. They start off quite vague, i.e: "graffiti, fog on the platform" to getting quite precise, such as "and a man who followed me back from the library". I think this is a perfect representation of someone going on a journey to find themselves and adds to the idea of creating, or finding your own character. 

In conclusion, Seatter creates a sense of identity by using a gradual climax of specific language to paint a picture of the speakers personality. He creates a polite individual who says "please and sorry one hundred times over" and someone who is comes "from kindness". 
He allows the reader to go an odyssey with the speaker and I think not only has he created the speakers identity but he also concedes the reader to create an identity too.